There were two additional updates after sp3 which brings the software version to 2017.1.1. These updates were not sr's or hotfixes, they're actual point updates including new features. As long as you are able to work on your current version productively, then I wouldn't recommend upgrading to the point releases. It's not likely they fixed your issues there as you observed earlier. I would wait until the 2018 release with sr1 or 2. We should have that soon anyway.

oldguy4440 posted at 8:35AM Mon, 03 April 2017 - #4301388

The max script was provided to me by an Autodesk representative who acknowledged the problem. They have some illegal callbacks in their C++ 2015 as the error thrown is not an Autodesk error but a Windows error and they know the issue exists. After a day of troubleshooting the issue I traced it to the 2015 C++ redistributable.".

Ignore my other message, we must have been typing at the same time. Was this addressed in 2017.1, or is that the version you're using?

oldguy4440, are you using any plugins or scripts that engage at startup? Old startup scripts can cause problems, and plugins can almost definitely crash the software. We've found 2017 quite stable until you try saving custom layouts. Corrupted config files caused startup crashes, which could be fixed by simply deleting the config files and having the software overwrite them again. Beware of low ram, and peaked system resources. Keep an eye on your Task Manager cpu performance and memory usage. I agree with luxxeon about contacting support.

It would literally be impossible to accurately determine how many studios are using Blender.  There aren't many who are admitting to it, that's for sure. The reason for that is laid out quite intelligently in this article by Sean Kennedy, about Blender's use in Hollywood:

http://blenderdiplom.com/en/interviews/548-interview-sean-kennedy-on-blender-in-hollywood.html

As Sean puts it, you have studios which invest big money into developing their own proprietary software, or extensions to existing software, and those studios like to talk about that when asked how they accomplished certain shots.  Deservedly so.  So much of the ground breaking technology brought to VFX is the result of countless, uncredited nights of hard work by largely unrecognized but extraordinarily talented individuals.  While Blender is being used in some studios, it's usually a minor or very specialized role somewhere in the pipeline, where a particular need is required, but expense doesn't justify paying the TD or programmers to create a customized extension to the current toolsets.  This is where the open source nature of Blender comes in very handy in saving resources or expenses.

One major misconception also is that all professional level studios use all proprietary software.  This is completely false.  Many many high level VFX and Game studios are using commercial grade software, usually in a highly customized and extended modular form.  Some studios are also being indirectly assisted by major software companies, and given unprecidented access to  in-house technical support, and privatized or micro-focused development, in exchange for crediting their products in behind the scenes interviews, and special features.

As for hard numbers, the most we could glean is that Autodesk is a major powerhouse in the world of VFX and 3D.  Let's look at numbers provided by Forbes about the company:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/shelisrael/2013/01/23/1785/

Over 100 million users have downloaded their software, or accessed the company's online properties.  As of 2013, this number was growing at the rate of 15 million users per month.  Even if just 1 percent of that number translates to active registered users, per package, per month, that's a very respectable and hugely influential number.  The price point of their software also means an incredible flow of monetary resources, which translates to access to some of the best programmers and developers money can buy.  Regardless of your personal opinion of them, it's clearly evident that they have the financial backing to do some incredible things.  It's fair to speculate that no software would be generating figures like this if they weren't proven effective, and worth the investment.

It's fairly evident that for independent artists, Blender is probably the best investment one could make, but large companies and studios have reasons to use other resources.

OpenGL engines can have issues with thin triangles, or "sliver" polygons.  If OGL thinks a triangle is too thin to be rendered at a given resolution, then it won't rasterize, and aliasing or other glitches can occur.  All quads are converted to triangles, so extremely thin, skinny quads will produce sliver triangles, which are problematic in almost every situation. Similarly, long skinny polygons tend to produce mapping issues, as mentioned above.

As a general rule of thumb, regularly shaped polygons, with edges and angles of a similar shape a size, typically produce the most predictable results in every possible situation.

 I like the conservative poly count of the model, and sensible edge flow.  The texturing actually looks fine to me.  I see areas in your albedo map which could use extra detail, but the unwrap appears above average.  I don't see any pixel smearing caused by stetched UV's, and there's no visible seams.  Overall, a fine model.

Quote - Ok, I was looking at the download page for the product.  The only options there are Windows and Mac.  There was no Linux download option.  Why?

I do not work with Autodesk products anymore, mate.  Thanks in large part to c4dfreelancers.com, I've been keeping true to my favored work app.

I appreciate the info, Daniel, and forgive me for asking, but why would you move a rigging pipeline to Linux if you don't have plans to bring the modelling guys along with it?  I've never been part of a system where modelling and rigging weren't in the same production flow.  Granted, it's been a while since I was last part of any vfx pipelines.  I've been modelling for a UK based visualization studio for the past 4 months, and the pipeline for this kind of work is a little different.  I recall the last broadcast animation studio I worked with kept the modelling, texturing, and rigging teams on the same custom HPC/WS rigs (under Windows), because the way things needed to move along, they had to be.  Similar solution, I believe,  for the one before that.  I'm not knocking anyone's system, just curious why they got split.

 

Sinnersaint,

The modeling, production planning, texture mapping, and matte painting departments are now part of the Pre-Production workgroup.  Rigging has been reallocated to work more closely with the Animation dept., and others, as part of the Shot Production workgroup.  Most of the modeling dept. has decided to continue working with 3dsmax, but Rigging and Animation is now being done entirely with Autodesk Maya.   All of these departments work closely together, of course.  Asset tracking and data synergy between departments is typically done through FBX and OBJ standards, if not application-native file formats, so there's no need for departmental workstations to function on any singular OS.  Cross-platform asset sharing has never been an issue of concern.

Quote - Maya - No native linux support.

Maya does support Linux natively.  Look here.  We've recently moved our animation and rigging departments to Maya seats, on Linux - Fedora.  There are no plans to do this with our modeling and texturing seats.

ILM and Dreamworks are two of the most noteable studios employing literally hundreds of Linux workstations, and renderfarms, with deep proprietary applications, as well as commercially available products.  The very best proprietary software is traditionally built on top of open-source software.  This, however, shouldn't be considered the industry standard.  Not every studio in the industry utilize proprietary software, and commercially-available packages do have a long, prolific lineage in the motion picture FX industry.

I don't have hard numbers, but if I were to speculate, based on the information I have seen, I would say the majority of studios are still using Windows or Mac for the largest number of seats. 

Autodesk once released information suggesting 3dsmax was the 3D software package with the largest registered user base of the "big 3".  This was about 7 or 8 years ago, but I imagine it is still the case today, and as previously mentioned, it is only available for Windows. I have seen 3dsmax hosted in Wine and Ubuntu, but not in a production environment.  This would seem to indicate that there are a great deal of professional studios, particularly in the gaming and architectural CG communities,  running on Windows-based seats.

Very nice render.

Quote - I find proper car models the most difficult to find. Very few are accurate or seem to be accurate...

Turbosquid has extremely high quality, accurate car models of all types.  Most of the world's most talented modelers sell their works professionally on Turbosquid in between studio projects.

Highly accurate NASCAR model

Indeed, the author is a well respected 3D programmer and pioneer in realtime visualization.  The page in question talks about the OBJ file format through the three.json loader.  Tony could have chosen any number of the millions of free OBJ models available to use in the photo example on that subject, so he must have really liked something about your model.  Congratulations for sure!

The chesterfield ottoman looks like a very nice model, but why did it take 7 hours, while the chain link fence took you only 3?  What software application do you use for modeling?  Do you have any more examples of your work?